RESTRUCTURING: RESOLVING THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN …

Global Journal of Political Science and Administration

Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020

Published by ECRTD-UK

Print ISSN: 2054-6335(Print), Online ISSN: 2054-6343(Online)

1

RESTRUCTURING: RESOLVING THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN NIGERIA

Marietu .S. Tenuche

Department of Political Science, Kogi State University, Anyigba

Joseph .O. Achegbulu

Department of Public Administration, Kogi State University, Anyigba

ABSTRACT: The paper titled “Restructuring Resolving the National Question in Nigeria” x-

rays the challenges befacing the country in the quest for national unity and integration. The

study using content analysis and qualitative research through adoption of secondary data and

oral interview found amongst others the divergent and often contradictory opinions of Nigerian

elites on wide range of issues such as national structure, fiscal federation, national security to

mention but few. The primordial character of the ruling class, poor governance at all levels as

well as selfish disposition of elites as largely responsible for the loud demand for restructuring.

The study therefore concludes that the centrifugal tendencies of Nigerian ruling class is

responsible for the outcry for restructuring. The study recommended amongst others the

strengthening of institutions and governance mechanisms and behavioural modifications of

Nigerians.

KEY WORDS: restructuring, national integration, federating units, good governance, national

conference.

INTRODUCTION

Two main issues have defied resolution since the amalgamation of the entity called Nigeria in

1914. These are the structure of the Nigeria Federation or the perceived imbalance in the

structure of Nigeria as a federation and fiscal federalism or resources allocation in the country.

These two issues have been at the root of agitations by the various ethnic nationalities that make

up the Nigerian state from the pre-independence era till date. Every administration since the

amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914 had to contend with agitations that culminated in one form of

restructuring adjustment or the other. The traditional method which made appeal to the various

administrations is the convocation of a national conference which in turn gave birth to new or

revised constitutions. Between 1914 and 2014 eleven conferences were held to fashion out an

acceptable federal structure and the best method for an acceptable model of resource sharing and

yet since the APC Government led by Muhammadu Buhari came to power in 2015 there has

been a had push by some ethnic nationalities demanding for a new structure for the Nigerian

federation. The push has culminated in the emergence of a group called the Independent People

of Biafra which has since been criminalized as a terrorist group, the Avengers in the South South

among other militant groups. The activities of these groups have generated a lot of reactions and

counter reactions from other groups. Specifically, the Arewa Youths responded to the activities

of IPOB by given an ultimatum to the Igbos from the South East to vacate the Northern State.

Efforts by the APC led government is further aggravating agitations as governments actions and


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



2

inactions interms of public policies are given ethnic colorations. At the inception of the Buhari

administration, the administration attempted to play down on the demands for restructuring

calling it the antics of the opposition-Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). However, the loud

agitations it would appear has forced government to shift ground as the ruling APC have had to

consider setting up a committee to advise government on the thorny issue.

The concern of this paper is to examine the reactions of some opinion leaders in Kogi and

Kwara States on the on-going national discourse on restructuring with a view to eliciting from

them a most likely method of finding a way out of the seemingly intractable problem. A number

of issues are germane to the study. One is, is the loud clamour for restructuring of genuine

concern to the ordinary Nigeria citizen. The fundamental question are demand for a larger and

better share of the national cake. How widespread is this demand across the country? What is the

nature and dimension of the demand? What is the perception of the articulate members of the

country on the seemingly hydra headed monster called restructuring?

METHODOLOGY

The concern of this paper is to collate the perception and reaction of some opinion leaders to the

on-going national discourse on restructuring. In doing so, efforts were made to randomly select

respondents from each of the Senatorial Districts in the two States (Kogi and Kwara) surveyed.

Our secondary sources of data include textbooks, journals, newspaper reports and the reports of

the National Conference of 2005, 2014 and the Executive Summary of the Report on National

Conferences.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

National Conferences in Nigeria: A Historical Perspective

Every administration since the amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914 contended with agitations that

culminated in the convocation of a conference. The conferences that occurred before Nigeria’s

independence were convened to address the issues of the low representation of Nigerians in

governance. However, the perceived imbalance in the structure of the country and the

appropriate constitution to adopt had started to generate some reactions even before

independence. They became issues for consideration at some of the conferences. This was

however played down by the nationalists to confront the pressing issue of independence from

colonial rule.

Specifically, between 1914 and 2014, eleven Conferences were held on Nigeria. That translates

to the country organizing a Conference at least once in every decade of her existence. The

Conferences include:

1. Accra 1920 which led to the Clifford Constitution of 1922

2. Macpherson Constitutional Conference, Ibadan,1950

3. London Constitutional Conference, July 30 to August 22 1953 concluded from January-

February 1954 (to revise the 1951 Constitution that adopted a federal constitution)

4. Nigerian Constitutional Conference, London, May and June 1957


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



3

5. Adhoc Constitutional Conference, September 12, 1966

6. Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), September 1975

7. Constituent Assembly, 1977

8. Constitutional Review Committee September 1987 (This culminated in the inauguration

of the Constituent Assembly which gave birth to the 1989 constitution).

9. National Constitutional Conference, June 26 1994 to June 1995

10. National Political Reform Conference, February to July 2005

11. The National Conference, 2014, April-July 2014

These conferences made modest contributions towards resolving the national question at each

epoch during the growth of Nigeria where each conference built upon the previous. However, the

conferences were not without challenges. The major difficulty was usually the achievement of

the set objectives for the conferences.

Upon the attainment of independence in 1960, the issue of the imbalance of the federal structure

became quite contentious and the management of the country’s plurality became problematic.

The popular phrases of some of the founding fathers of Nigeria readily come to mind. One of

such is the statement credited to the late Premier of the Northern Region and Sardauna of

Sokoto, Sir Ahmadu Bello who asserted that “the mistake of 1914 has come to light” in apparent

response to the 1914 amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectorates. The Premier

often told his contemporaries that the differences among the various communities should not be

swept under the carpet but should be understood for the successful management of our plurality.

Chief Obafemi Awolowo described Nigeria “as a mere geographical expression”.

The contentious issues that have continued to defy solutions in Nigeria are power sharing and

resource distribution. These issues have generated a lot of debate during military regimes and in

the present democratic dispensation. In President Abacha’s inaugural address to the 1994

Constitutional Conference; he explained that

A contentious controversial issue that has dogged our nation’s political history is the question of

revenue allocation. The primacy of this problem is evidenced by the series of memoranda which

the Constitutional Conference Commission received on the subject. Since independence

successive Administration has grappled with the question of an equitable statutory distribution of

revenue from the Federal Account. In fact, this issue predates our independence when the

question was whether allocation should be based on derivation or on need. We have always

looked for a formula which takes into account the facts of nationhood, and the overall national

interest. Any useful and long lasting revenue allocation formula has a conform to the political

structure of t h e country. One of the valid observations which have been made is that, revenue

allocation should complement rather than substitute revenue generation.

With the advent of democratic rule in 1999, there was a strong push for the convocation of a

Sovereign National Conference. Civil society groups dubbed the 1999 constitution a military

document that did not emanate from the people although the preamble to the document read

“WE THE PEOPLE”. There was also the feeling by proponents of the Conference that the

structure and nature of the federalism we operate required an overhaul.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



4

The Federal Government of Nigeria under the leadership of President Olusegun Obasanjo

eventually acceded to the calls for a National Conference when on 21st February, 2005

inaugurated what he called the National Political Reform Conference (NPRC) under the

chairmanship of Justice Niki Tobi (Rtd). The demands for the convocation of a Sovereign

National Conference have been part and parcel of the agenda of democracy movements across

the country especially during the days of military absolutism. Specifically, the call had begun to

gather momentum under the Babangida Regime (1985-1993). It however reached a crescendo

following the annulment of the 12th June, 1993 Presidential election (see, Agbaje et al, 2004;

Ojo 2000). The orchestrated attempt by the late General Sani Abacha to succeed himself also

added bite to the struggle (Okpe, 2003:32). It was perhaps this development that warranted the

deeply entrenched contempt with which General Abacha’s 1994/95 Conference was treated.

Given the foregoing background, it was therefore not surprising to see the high upsurge in the

emergence of many more forces, especially of identity, calling for convocation of the national

conference when Nigeria transited to democracy in May, 1999. This is because given the

expected opening of the public space for democratic discussion, deliberation, disagreement, and

consensus as a result of the political liberalization of the public sphere, room was created “for the

expression of bottled up anger and frustration, which successive military regimes unduly

suppressed through the executive suffocation and constriction of the public space” (see Omotola,

2005: Adebanwi,2003). Despite the fact that various nationalists had different issues to be tabled

at the conference, a common denominator of the call was unanimity of the opinions on the types

of conference to be convened-a Sovereign National Conference (SNC), whereby the decisions of

the conference will have a force of law and binding on the state and society as well as their

agents. Not quite unexpectedly, the idea of SNC did not go down well with the managers of the

state, particularly the presidency and the National Assembly. For them, the convocation of the

SNC amounts to creating a parallel centre of power to those of duly elected representatives of the

people. More fundamentally, the comparative experience of SNC across the globe especially in

Benin Republic has not been very palatable to the conveners (see, Nzouankey, 1993; Heibrunn,

1993: Omitogun and Onigu-Otite, 1996). In Benin for example, the sovereignty accorded the

national conference empowered it such that at the end, the convener, President Mathieu Kerekou,

was totally stripped of his powers (Omitogun and Onigu-Otite, 1996:25-26).

But as the tempo of the call heightened in Nigeria, President Olusegu Obasanjo eventually saw

the need for a form of forum for National Dialogue, hence the inauguration of the NPRC.

Justifying the NPRC, President Obasanjo declared while inaugurating it on the February 21,

2005 that:

Our history as a nation shows very clearly that we have been through some difficulty times. We

have missed great opportunities. Our historical experience at constitutional making and political

reform shows that we may have some structural defects that require adjustment so as not to

constrain the deepening, widening and consolidation of democratic values and practices

(Obasanjo, 2005).


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



5

The above suggests that the president not prepared for any fundamental changes in the state and

society but mere “adjustments”. One may therefore submit that the NPRC was carefully

packaged and designed to ensure “adjustments” in areas considered to be contentions so as to

placate and silence the advocates of SNC particularly the progressive forces.

Nevertheless, following months of deliberations, at times under tumultuous atmosphere

especially toward the last days of the Conference, the NPRC formally submitted its report to the

president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Abuja on Sunday, July 24, 2005.

Setting Framework for National Question

The issue of the national question is fundamental in Nigeria, as in elsewhere, Onyeoziri

(2002:10) avers that the national question “afflicts many political systems, hardly has a final

solutions, is complex or multi-dimensional in nature, and is historically contingent”. Despite this

generalization, the national question may vary in its form and character among nations and

within a nation. To fully grapple with the national question would therefore require a contextual

analysis that emphasizes the particularities of the question in a given policy. At a general level,

the national question connotes “the totality of issues that can take heavy tolls on national rebirth,

integration and development” (Saliu and Omotola, 2006). Within the Nigerian context, however,

the national question has been defined as “the perennial debate as to how to order the relations

between the different ethnic, linguistic and cultural groupings so that they have some rights and

privileges, access to power and an equitable share of national resources”. (Ajayi, 1992 in Saliu

and Omotola). In a related vein, Albert (2001:272) defines the national question in Nigeria as

primarily concerned with group rights, self-determination, truth, justice, fairness and respect for

others”. For Oyovbaire (1989:385 in Saliu and Omotola), the national question pertains to “the

concrete problem of social existence arising from assertive competition among persons who

possess multi-ethnic or multi-communal and regional consciousness, with which was created in

its foundation by the turn of the 19th century, and of its articulation since that time, by and under

colonial domination” (Saliu and Omotola, 2006).

What the following conceptualization of the national question in Nigeria suggests is that, for us

to be able to decipher and grapple very decisively with the national question in Nigeria, there is

need for some historical insights on the evolution and development of Nigeria. It is within such

historical insights that we can locate the deepening crisis of the Nigerian state and society

particularly the crisis and condition of the federal framework and democracy in Nigeria (see,

Amuwo, etal, 1998; Gana 2003; Onwudiwe and Subera, 2005).

Historical perspectives to the National Question

It is a well-known fact that Nigeria was a colonial creation. Before the advent of colonialism, the

various groups that constituted Nigeria today had operated different political and administrative

systems suitable for them (see Omotola, 2004). It was these various groups, which scholars have

put at over 400 that colonialism forcefully brought together under British control but

administered through divide and rule policy. As such, while Lagos was run as a crown colony via

direct rule, the Northern part was administered as a protectorate via indirect rule. This was in

order to maximize the benefits of colonial adventure and perhaps lay precarious foundation for


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



6

nation building. As it turned out, the amalgamation of 1914 evidenced this as it was much more

real on paper than in practice. Years after the amalgamation, the North and South continued with

their separate administration (Omotola 2004:243).

The chain of conferences and constitutions that evolved under colonial administration, though

largely borne out of the precarious balance of the polity, was however incapable of redressing the

problem rather, it complicated it. For instance, the elective principle introduced by the Clifford

Constitution was restricted to Lagos and Calabar on the basis of limited franchise. The

regionalism introduced by Richard Constitution of 1946, remains till today, the very foundation

of mainstreaming of identify politics into National life. The adoption of a perverted Federal

System by the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954, given its violation of J.S Mill’s law of federal

stability that requires that no part of the federating units be larger than other sides combined

together and the eclectic attempt by the post-colonial state to redress the imbalance, has also

been a major source of contradiction (see, Nwosu, etal, 1998). As such, at independence in 1960,

the political economy of the country was already well distorted and therefore not strong enough

to receive shocks (see Osaghae, 1998). Under the first Republic (1960-1966), the organization of

the state was done in such a way that regional governments were empowered both in terms of

power sharing and resources allocation, culminating in reasonable degree of autonomy for the

regions. For instance, by the 1963 Republican Constitution of Nigeria, each region was entitled

to 50 percent of their natural resources. However, by section 142 of that Constitution, each

region was expected to contribute to the costs of administration in a consolidation revenue fund

proportionate to the share of duties received by it in a financial year (cf Daily sun, June 18,

2005.5). This was to be drastically altered as a result of the civil war that engulfed the country

between 1967 and 1970. During this period, Nigeria tended towards a unitary system despite its

publicly avowed commitment to federalism. As part of the measures to weaken the secessionist

Biafra, new states were created in 1967 and the principle of derivation was introduced to revenue

allocation and was assigned 5 percent. Today, derivation attracts 13percents as provided by the

1999 Constitution. The Constitution apportions ownership of all natural resources to the Federal

Government via its section 44(13).

Over the years, this development has been a major source of tension in Nigeria. There has been a

persistent call for an upward review of the relative weight assigned to derivation especially from

the oil producing states in the Niger Delta. This is particularly so since oil remains the major

sources of revenue generation and foreign exchange earnings for the country (see Obi, 1998).

Besides the massive destruction of farmlands and rivers due to oil exploration and exploitation in

the area, the poor living condition of the people has been another justification for the demand,

which has in recent times graduated to the struggle for resource control.

Unfortunately, the response of the government to these agitations has been through propaganda,

indifferences and the use of force (see, Ovwasa, 1999). In most cases, the government preferred

the violent option as epitomized by the response to the Ogoni uprising, and the infamous Odi

massacre. These years of neglect and deprivation have led to a massive emergence and

proliferation of ethnic militias. Notable among them are the Egbesu boys; Chikiko movement,

Niger Delta Volunteer people Force (NDVPF) led by Alhaji Mujahid Dokubo Asari; and the


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



7

Ateke Tom Niger Delta vigilante group (NDVG) and more recently the Niger Delta Avengers.

With the recommendation of the 17 percent by the NPRC as the new derivation formula in 2005,

these groups threatened war unless they are given power to control their resources.

But for the non-oil producing states specifically the Northern states, the demand of the Niger

Delta was unnecessarily, too high. According to Sam Aluko(Sam), the revenue used to explore

oil in Niger Delta in the first instance came from other regions of the country; second, agriculture

still contributes a higher percentage of 41% to the GDP of the country as against the 1.4 from oil.

The issue of resources control is therefore considered as unjustified. The people of the Niger

Delta region debunked this position. They argued that the capital for exploration of oil in the

region was sourced by foreign firms that were interested in the oil industry. These companies

included the Nigerian Bitumen Company in 1908, Shell D. ARCY 1940 and in 1946 Shell

Company and British Petroleum (BP) Company that finally discovered oil at Oloibiri in 1956

(ANNKIO BRIGGS 2014). They also argued that at present oil revenue contributes 88% of

Nigeria’s total revenue earning. For the people of the Niger Delta, it estimated that oil will expire

in the region in another thirty years and that given the level of the degradation of the

environment as a result of oil exploration activities and the difficult terrain, the region requires

huge sums of money to clean up the environment.

Beyond revenue allocation, there is also the dimension of power sharing among the various

groups that make up the federation. Nigeria has over the years operated a form of centralized

federalism where the central government has overwhelming control of power and resources

thereby placing other tiers of government at the mercy and as appendages of the central

government (see, Onwudiwe and Suberu 2005). The 1999 Constitution shows that 68 items are

on the exclusive list, while the concurrent list has only 10 broad items, which are further split

into 30. But in the event of a clash between the federal and state government on any of such

issues, the federal position takes precedent. The implication of this, as Festus Keyamo has

observed, is that the federal government can legislate on 98 areas to the detriment of the state (cf,

sun, 19 June, 2005:11). This issue also resonated at the National Conference 2014.

The issue of vertical revenue allocation among the three tiers of government has been another

crises spot. While the relative weight assigned to each tier varies under different regimes, one

obvious fact is that the federal government has always been over patronized. As at today, the

Federal Government takes 56 percent, states 24 percent and local government 20 percent. This

leaves at the disposal of the federal government enormous financial resources mostly used for

unproductive activities such as servicing an over bloated and lazy bureaucracy at the centre.

The implications of the foregoing on Nigerian’s political development are glaring. Most

importantly is the unhealthy rivalry and competition for power at the centre so as to have access

to the federal wealth by the various groups in the country. This partly explains the rise in the

spate of secessionist threats, proliferation of ethnic militias and ethno-religious conflicts (see,

CFCR, 2002:30). Indeed, the concern among the elites and politicians is “who lost powers, who

won powers, and who wants power back”. This has been well played out in Nigeria especially

since independence. But in the struggle, the Northern part of the country is alleged to have


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



8

gained considerably at the expense of the other parts (see Ayoade,1998). It was the annulment of

the June 12, 1993 presidential election by General Babangida and the attendant impasse that

precipitated the power shift agenda. Today, the Northerners are clamoring for a return of “their”

power, having relinquished, it for 15 years. For the South South, it is their turn to produce the

President of Nigeria, as the “hen that lays the golden egg” of the country. The South East too felt

that as third largest ethnic group in Nigeria, they should automatically produce the president, the

two larger groups (Hausa and Yoruba) having had their turns.

The foregoing analysis attests to the fact that the Nigerian Federalism is really a project in crisis

(Osaghea, 2005: Olukoshi and Ogbu, 1996). These deepening crises and contradictions, as

illustrated above, underscore the call and justification for a SNC. After initial resistance, the

Obasanjo presidency finally succumbed to pressures from the challenges posed by increasing

spate of national insecurity, ethnic militants and secessionist threats by setting up a NPRC to

pacify these groups and address some of the bases of agitations.

The view of the Nigerian government on the national question as well as how to effectively

manage it were articulated in president Obasanjo’s inaugural address to the NPRC on 21st

February, 2005 (see, Obasanjo, 2005). The national question in Nigeria, according to president

Obasanjo, revolves around some basically contentions issues, which he identified to

include the issues of national identity, freedom and liberty, social justice, rights and obligations,

electoral reforms that ensure credibility and respectability of elections, relations between tiers of

government: performance of government and how to ensure truly democratic governance for all.

These issues, according to the President, pose a serious challenge of constitutionalism and

constitutional reform; the opportunity to bring all stake holders together to discuss the preferred

path for the Nation; the challenge of building new, accountable, responsible and focused

leadership, and how to build, operate and sustain real political parties. Accordingly, the

President sums up the central challenge as “how to strengthen the social contract between the

custodians of state power and the governed” (Obasanjo, 2005:8).

The submission of the president suggested that the government was not unmindful of the position

of different groups as they related to the call for a restructuring of Nigeria federalism, equity

among various nationalities, and more importantly, the increasing pressure on the government to

deliver on its promises and social responsibilities to the citizens. The official view was that

government’s economic reforms have begun to yield positive results and according to the

president, “if we stay on course and remain resolute, we are all bound to rap the benefits of our

sacrifices and investments in the reform agenda”

But for gains of the economic reforms to be sustainable, the government saw the need for a

political reform agenda. Such an exercise was generally seen as capable of providing a

conductive political environment for the consolidation of the gains from economic reforms,

hence the NPRC. The NPRC is not the same as Sovereign National Conference (SNC) properly

advocated for by the people. The bases for the rejection of SNC were all articulated by the

President. For one, Nigeria does not exhibit the features of a collapsed state that requires a SNC.

In such a state, the structures of states have effectively collapsed, amidst a deep-seated


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



9

legitimacy crisis. Two, in the few African states where a SNC was convened; it did not result in

the institution of democracy (Obasanjo, 2005:14). Given these realities, it may therefore sound

absurd to convene a SNC in Nigeria.

Furthermore, the President considered the call for a conference of ethnic nationalities as uncalled

for. According to him, the idea is “rather unrealistic, inequitable and unworkable” as it may not

necessarily guarantee the fear of marginalization expressed by minority groups. The resilience of

identity crisis in Nigeria according to the President was due to negative manipulation of identity

by “ethnic entrepreneurs” for selfish ends. The president also rejected the use of class analysis in

the explication of the crisis of the Nigeria state. Rather, classes and strong adherence to ideas and

methods were a language of the past that have been transcended all over the world but had

combined the retard Nigerian’s march towards unity and development.

Given the foregoing, the president considers certain issues as given in Nigeria and must therefore

are not to be compromised. These issues includes: The oneness of Nigeria; Federalism and

Federal System of government; presidentialism; Multi-religiosity (security); Federal character,

popular participation, the fundamental objective and directive principles of state policy; and

separation of powers. The NPRC was therefore charged to device workable means of

strengthening these issues, as they constitute the core of democratic governance.

One basic fact that emanated from the above was the government was not prepared for any form

of radical departure from the status quo. This could better be gleaned from the president’s

inaugural speech to the NPRC, which repeatedly emphasized the need for redressing “structural

defects that require adjustments” (Obasanjo, 2005:5-6). In fact, the NPRC was “to assist

constitutionally established legitimate structures of government the executive, legislature and

judiciary to grow, become more dynamic, more accountable and more capable of delivering

service to the people”.

Without any doubt, the structure and institution of government in Nigeria suffer some deficit.

This has resulted in a seeming alienation of some constituencies, coups and counter-coups, weak

political parties, poor leadership, corruption and inability of the state to meet the basic needs of

the people perhaps. It was this that informed government’s position on the need to strengthen the

structure of governance, redefine and reform these institutions without necessarily pulling them

down.

BUILD UP TO THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2014

The 2005 National Political Reform Conference cannot be adjudged to be conclusive first

because towards the concluding part of the Conference there was an allegation that the then

President Olusegun Obasanjo sought to elongate his stay in office as President by introducing a

third term agenda into the Conference. More fundamental was the fact that the issue of resource

control and derivation to accrue to the oil producing states could not be resolved. The

Conference was also not able to resolve the issue of an acceptable federal structure for the

country.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



10

On assumption of office as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2007, Umaru

Yar’adua had to contend with dwindling oil revenue as a result of heightened militancy by youth

in the Niger Delta region. To restore peace and security in the Niger Delta region and ensure

increased oil extraction from the region, President Yar’Adua introduced the Amnesty

Programme to assuage the militants in the area. The youth gangs had intensified the

vandalization of oil pipelines and resorted to the kidnapping of workers of multinationals in the

oil industry. That resulted in the reduction of oil production to about 50%. Nigeria is largely

dependent on oil for survival and that forced the President to take urgent action to stem the tide

of violence in the region by introducing the amnesty programme.

On assumption of office, President Goodluck Jonathan was also confronted with strong

agitations for the convocation of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC). The circumstances

that forced the Senate to adopt the doctrine of necessity that led to the confirmation of the then

Vice President Goodluck Jonathan as President fuelled the agitations for a Sovereign National

Conference. Those that agitated for a Sovereign National Conference held the strong position

that only such a Conference could guarantee a true sense of belonging among the various ethnic

groups that constitute Nigeria.

The decision by President Goodluck Jonathan to contest for another term in office in 2015 and

the strong opposition to this by politicians of the Northern extraction gave further bite to the call

for the convocation of a Sovereign National Conference. Some Scholars (Jinadu, Egwu and

Elaigwu 2014) have identified several other factors that contributed to overheating the polity in

the build up to the 2015 general elections and therefore heightened the calls for a National

Conference. These include:

1. The desire of the North to regain power in 2015

2. The decision of President Jonathan to run for a second term in 2015

3. The structural character of the Nigerian state as the site for zero-sum electoral

competition for the acquisition of political power and with it access to and control of the vast

economic power in confers.

4. The mutual fear of ethnic domination among the country’s political elite, resulting in the

political mobilization of ethnicity and the creation of ethno-regional voting bank.

5. Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East that is seeking to dismember the Nigerian state

since 2008. The rise in insurgency terrorism including suicide bombings in Maiduguri, Kaduna,

Kano, Abuja, Gombe, Bauchi, Jos etc.

6. Intensified kidnapping in the South-South, South-East, communal violence, insurgency

and terrorism in the Northern States.

7. Weak institutionalization of democracy and accountability-promoting institutions,

reflecting persistence/apparent intractability of corruption, flawed competitive and electoral

politics.

8. Anti-people oriented public policies, reflecting the failure of the state at the Federal, State

and Local Government to live up to their obligation as evidenced in unprecedented high level of

corruption, mass unemployment and grand scale level of impunity.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



11

Against this backdrop, President Jonathan was compelled to convoke a National Conference in

order to restore calm in the overheated polity. Given this background to the convocation of the

National Conference 2014, most participants at the Conference has set minds on key national

issues. The plural nature of the state and the various cleavages therein was visible from the

inauguration of the Conference. This was evidenced in the positions of various groups that came

with written position papers on what they wanted from the Conference.

Specifically, there were demands from the South. The position of the South was presented by the

delegates from the South West, South East and the South- South. The Middle Belt also made

some strong demands at the Conference. Although the Middle Belt operated as a part of the

Northern Delegate Forum, they made specific demands that were not necessarily a part of a

common Northern position.

The demands of the different groups could be summarized as follows:

A. SOUTH-SOUTH

1. Nigeria reverts back to the 1963 constitution

2. Resource control to ensure that oil producing states exercise some control over the

production and management of mineral resources in their area and only pay royalty to the central

government

B. SOUTH WEST

1. Nigeria should revert back to the old regional governments with the regions having their

separate constitutions.

C. SOUTH EAST

1. Full integration into Nigeria as citizens after the Biafran war with equal rights and parity

of states in the geo-political zones

D. MIDDLE BELT

1. The Middle Belt demanded for the protection of minority rights

2. Creation of additional states to accommodate the interest of minority groups in the North

3. Development of solid minerals in their respective states

4. Power rotation

5. Completion of the Ajaokuta Steel Project

These positions appear to define the concept of restructuring as is been canvassed by proponents.

The instrument used for the study therefore solicited responses on a number of issues that

include regionalism, resource control, derivation, Unity of the country, the preferred revenue

sharing formula and the desired formula for sharing resources among States, local government

autonomy among others.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



12

PERCEPTION ON THE ON the CONTEMPORARY DEBATE ON RESTRUCTURING

AND THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN NIGERIA (FROM KWARA AND KOGI

STATES.)

There was a general consensus that the concept restructuring meant different things to the

various entities that make up Nigeria. The divergent opinions based on interview conducted are

presented below:

President of the Front for Ebira Solidarity(FES):

According to the President of the Front For Ebira Solidarity (FES),

for the South West restructuring means going back to Regionalism based on the 1963

Constitution. For people in the South West, the region witnessed development that was

sustainable during that period. For the South South restructuring is synonymous with resources

control. For the North West, the concern is the demand that leadership position is rotated among

the Hausa Bakwai. The feeling is that presently Kano, Sokoto and Katsina has been ruling

anytime the presidency is zoned to the North. The North East would want their destroyed home

land rebuilt. Another respondent was of the view that the word restructuring is part of human

nature as people desire changes from time to time. In Kogi State for example, people advocated

for the creation of Kogi State now some want Idah State some want Osara State. Even in the

advanced societies such as Britain the desire for adjustments led to the breaking away of some

communities. A respondent said restructuring means changing position to allow citizens feel the

impact of government.

The President Ilorin Emirate Forum

According to the President of the Ilorin Emirate Forum “restructuring was not new to Nigeria.

He gave the example to include the fact that Nigeria had 3 regions which was increased to 4.

The regions were broken to 12 states then to 19 and now 36 states. He said the quota system was

introduced into the civil service to address inequity in states representation in the service and

that there was power rotation when Jonathan from the minority group was given a shot at the

presidency to douse the cry of marginalization by his kinsmen”.

There was a consensus among respondents from Kogi and Kwara States that there is the need for

some form of adjustments. However, restructuring should not degenerate to the dismemberment

of the country and subscribed to Obasanjo’s view that the desired restructuring for Nigeria is that

of the mind of citizens. The changes required is attitudinal and not systemic and that what is

required is a change of our mind-sets and attitudes as Nigerians are generally selfish, always

thinking of the benefits they can derive from the leaders in position of authority. The respondent

from Kwara State is also of the view that Nigeria is not united. In his words “ a house that has

not been built cannot be said to have fallen apart. “He argued that people do not have the

consciousness of being Nigerians except during football matches or when stopped by the police

for checking of ‘documents’

Despite the strong position of some Nigerians on the need for restructuring, most of the

respondents interviewed were of the opinion that Nigeria is a united country. Nigerians still


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



13

reside in any part of the country even where they are not indigenes of those areas. Another

position was that inter-ethnic marriages had strengthened the bond of unity among Nigerians and

so had the Land Use Decree that allowed citizens to own land in any part of the country. The

respondent said we must agree that there are disagreements among Nigerians on a number issues

but that does not suggest that the country is not united.

The Former Chairman Edu Lcoal Government Kwara State.

According to the former Chairman of Edu Local government in Kwara State said the fact

remains that Nigerians have been together since 1914 suggests that the country is united.

Respondents interviewed were of the opinion that Nigerians would not wish to go back to

regionalism as practiced under the 1963 Constitution and regions that were a creation of the

colonial regime that would no longer work. The view was expressed that having enjoyed some

level of autonomy after alleged marginalization by some majority groups, smaller groups would

resist any arrangement to go back to regionalism. The State would not want to lose the autonomy

they have.

Former Minister and Chairman, People’s Democratic Party According to the former Minister and Chairman, People’s Democratic Party, “the South Eastern

Nigeria was made up of the South East and the South South. At the end of the civil war in 1970,

the Ibos were not able to retrieve their properties seized by the people of River states till date, so

bringing them back together will be vehemently resisted by the Rivers people. The respondent

was of the view that the values of the leaders and citizens had since changed and so regionalism

is no longer feasible. Their position was premised on the argument that the leaders at that time

like Sir Ahmadu Bello, Obafemi Awolowo and Nnamdi Azikiwe were not materialistic and were

more concerned about using resources available to develop the communities. The respondent

said regionalism on its own would not have been successful but for the selfless attitudes of the

leaders back then. The argument was that the present corps of leaders are selfish and

materialistic as such regionalism cannot work in cotemporary Nigeria. Some of the respondents

also expressed the opinion that the population of the country presently is much high than it used

to be and as such regionalism is no longer feasible.

On Devolution of Powers, respondents however generally agreed that the Federal Government

would have to devolve some of its powers to the units closer to the people. For the respondents

devolution of power is required in Nigeria. A respondent agreed that the Federal Government

should have coercive powers. A respondent from Kwara State was of the view that State

Governors are so powerful that they have to be begged to pay wages to civil servants so a strong

central government is required to check the excesses of the State Governors and their State

Assembly members.

On Security Matters, all the respondents were of the opinion that security matters should be

under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government and that the Federal Government should have

no business in agriculture, sports and the mining sectors. There is some consensus that the

Federal Government should have exclusive powers over external affairs, immigration, and


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



14

currency control while the States should have jurisdiction over power generation, roads,

infrastructure and even education.

On State Police, most respondents were averse to the having state Police not because the

objectives are not laudable but due to the fact that the State Governors as we now have them will

abuse the powers to regulate the police. A respondent argued that under the regions the

traditional rulers used the Native Authority Police to oppress the citizen. Their powers back then

were checked because they had their families’ names and crown to protect that in contemporary

Nigeria, the State Governors are so powerful and reckless with power that state police where

allowed will be deployed to persecute citizens. This according them can be observed even where

the security matters are presently under the jurisdiction of the federal government, the State

Governors use security operatives to harass the citizens and as such where we have State Police,

the Governors will use the institution to harass perceived opponents.

On autonomy for local governments, there was a consensus of opinion among respondents that

the Local Governments should be given autonomy and more resources to operate as a tier of

government because it is closest to the people. The respondents were of the view that the Joint

State Local Government Accounts should be scrapped. The respondents however cautioned that

the leadership of the local government should be closely scrutinized and checked. He argued that

when in 1976, Government opted that the local government was made a third tier of government

it was envisaged that very matured and experienced public officers would be attracted to work at

the local government level. The youth however took over control of the Local Government

claiming it was theirs and that accounted for the high level of poor governance at that level.

On Revenue Sharing Formula, all respondents are of the view that the revenue sharing formula

for the three levels of government should increase the allocation to the Local Governments. A

respondent suggested that the Federal Government should be allocated 50%, State 20% and

Local Government 30% as the States do not have constituencies. Another respondent is of the

view that the Local Government should have the highest allocation; this should be followed by

the States with the least allocation given to the Federal Government. Along this line of argument,

the respondent suggested a formula that gives only 30% to the Federal Government and 70% to

the other federating units.

On the desired Federating Units, most of the respondents from the two States were of the opinion

that the present structure of three tiers of government should remain. However, the local

governments should be given more powers and more resources deployed to that tier. A

respondent however had preference for a federating unit that consist of the central and local

government as it operates in Britain. This is due to the abuse of power by the State Governors

who appears uncontrollable. However, another respondent is of the view that the States must

exist to serve as a break to the overwhelming powers of the Federal Government. One

respondent has preference for a structure that accommodates the Federal Government and the

States. For this respondent from Kwara, whatever happens at the Local Government should be

determined by the States. Some state do not even need as many Local Governments as they

presently have whereas some need more. According to the respondent, presently monies meant


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



15

for the Local Governments are given to the State. Meanwhile the allocations to States are not

enough for them so what do we expect the states to give to the Local Governments he queried.

For him we are funding irresponsibility in Nigeria.

On the controversial issue of resource control and derivation, respondents were of the opinion

that the calls are unreasonable as states over the years have not been able to justify the monies

collected. The argument is that even where there is an increase, the monies are likely to be

abused. A respondent from Kogi went down memory lane and said the issue of derivation has

always been controversial. He said at the Constituent Assembly in 1977, the consensus reached

by members was that derivation should be put at 13% of oil revenue derived from the land area.

This decision was curiously changed to read that the derivation should include revenue derived

from offshore i.e the oil in the sea. This has been contentious because most of the country’s oil

about 90% is found in the sea and no state can lay claim to ownership of the sea. Respondents

expressed the fear that if the Niger Delta Region is allowed to have derivation that is based on oil

revenue derived from offshore resources, there will be too little money available to other states.

A respondent said even where derivation was increased to 100% the resources would be

misappropriated and abused. He said with the excess money that some states derive from

derivation they are no able to pay monthly salaries to workers. He said we need strong

institutions and appropriate sanctions to check the excesses of people in authority and not an

increase in of the derivation formula.

On the formula for the allocation of resources, members agree that it is a contentious issue that

will be difficult to resolve due to the high level of suspicion among the various nationalities that

make up Nigeria. The various criteria used presently are adequate as they take cognizance of the

areas of strength of the various regions. Land must be included as a criterion otherwise the

region with a large landmass and where food is largely produced will be shortchanged by areas

endowed with mineral resources.

Some of the respondents said that the crises of the national question can be addressed by the

National Assembly as citizens are becoming weary of Reports of Conferences that are not

implemented. There was also the view that conferences consume a lot of resources and they are

seen as unconstitutional bodies that run parallel to established institutions. A respondent was of

the opinion that Reports of Conferences were not implemented due to the selfish attitudes of

leaders. Specifically, he said the Abacha conference was rejected by many because it was seen as

a design by Abacha to transform from a military dictator to a civilian president. Obasanjo’s

Conference was seen as design to smuggle in a third term agenda so it was generally not

acceptable. The respondent said Buhari would not accept to implement the Jonathan 2014

Conference because Justice Kutugi chaired the 2014 Conference. He said, Kutugi was the Chief

Justice of Nigeria whose vote allegedly denied him court victory when he challenged Goodluck

Jonathan, election at the 2007 election.

Most of the respondents, however agreed that the National Assembly should work had to earn

the trust of the people. A respondent said the electoral system that brought in the National

Assembly members required an overhaul. For him, it is only where the electoral system is able


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



16

put in place credible representatives in the National Assembly that such an Assembly will b able

to address issues of National interest that will be acceptable to majority Nigerians. A respondent

was of the strong position that the National Assembly as presently constituted cannot address

serious issues of national interest. He said the Assembly will not want to change the structure

that helped him to get to office so no fundamental change can come from the National Assembly.

On Nigerians unity, some of the respondents are of the opinion that Nigeria is highly divided

largely because the elites are selfish and use religion and ethnicity to arouse division in the

country. A respondent is of the view that agitations are made to negotiate for a date power will

be zoned to their area. He argued that when the June 12, 1993 election was annulled, the loud

protest forced the zoning of office of the President to the South West and that brought Obasanjo

to power. He said the North used the Boko Haram crisis to oust Jonathan because they felt than

Yar’adua did not complete his two terms in office. The agitation that is presently on-going is

seen as reactions from the south to make governance difficult for Buhari from the North for not

allowing Jonathan go for a second term. For the respondent, the East is agitating with an aim to

get a date when the region will have a shot at the highest office.

The respondents are of the opinion that Buhari has not helped matters when he was alleged to

have said he owes more allegiance to the section of the country that gave him 92% of the votes

that brought him to power in 2015A respondent was of the view that the 2014 National

Conference addressed a number of issues agitating the minds of the agitators of restructuring and

as such the Report of that Conference should be adopted and debated by the National Assembly.

POSITION OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2014 ON MAJOR ISSUES

The Conference had 20 committees that deliberated on various issues of national interest that

include the various sectors of the economy, politics and religion, corrupt practices, economic

development, national security among others.

There were committees on; Devolution of Power, Political Restructuring and Forms of

Government; National Security, Environment, Politics and Governance, Law, Judiciary, Human

Rights and Legal Reform, social Sector, Transportation and Science, Technology and

Development. Others were committees on Agriculture, Civil Society, Labour and Sports, Public

Service, Political parties and Electoral Matters, Foreign and Diaspora Matters; Land tenure and

National boundaries, and Economy, trade and Investment. Others include: Energy; Religion,

Public Finance and Revenue, immigration and related matters.

The Conference Delegates were generally agreed and reached consensus on the reports of 19

Committees and made over 600 resolutions after exhaustive deliberations and amendments of

Committee Reports. A few of such that touch on the contemporary debate on restructuring are

highlighted below: The Conference decided/resolved:

1. That legislators at national and state levels would operate on part-time basis

2. That power would be devolved from the federal to the states.

3. That each state of the federation should have its own State Character Commission

to protect the interest of minority ethnic groups in the state. This implies that minority groups in


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



17

the 36 states of the federation would enjoy equal treatments in appointments into public service

of their different states. This is geared towards addressing the obvious restrictions to the

application of federal character principles at the state and local government levels.

4. That the civil service across the nation would operate common rules and practices

so that the citizenry is not confronted with different procedures when dealing with each arm and

tier of government.

5. That a separate Foreign Service Commission should be created with a chairman

and six commissioners, one of whom should be from each of the six geo-political zones.

6. That effort be made by government at all levels to make public offices disability-

friendly by providing special access facilities in line with international charters and treaties.

7. That henceforth, where either the President or the National Assembly fails to meet

timelines set for the passage of the appropriation Bill, government will have to shut down

operations. Consequently, Conference agreed that section 82 of the 1999 constitution which

deals with authorization of expenditure in default of appropriation be amended to stop any

expenditure by government in the event of a delay in the passage of the budget with established

timelines.

8. That the Federal Character Commission be renamed the Federal Character and

Equal Opportunities Commission to put it in better stead to address issues of affirmative action

for people living with disabilities.

9. That government should fund science and technology development programmes

up to 2% of the Federation Account while state government should contribute to research by way

of research projects.

10. That the immunity clause as enshrined in the constitution should be removed and

as such both the President and their Deputies could be dragged to court over criminal and civil

cases.

11. That the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation should be made to pay

prevailing interest rates on duly delayed remittances to the Federation Account. The resolution

was meant to discourage late or non-remittances of money by the corporation into the

Federation Account for allocation to the different tiers of government as demanded by law.

12. That Nigeria adopts a true federal structure with the states operating as the

federating units. With this, it was agreed that the creation of local government areas should be

done by the states as they deem necessary.

13. On right to self-determination, Conference agreed that minority groups that wish

to exist as separate states and meet the criteria for state creation should be allowed to do so under

the instrumentality of the relevant laws and procedures as part of their right to internal self-

determination. In making this proposal, Conference recognizes the unconditional rights and

freedom of every and any other ethnic nationality that considers itself as unjustly subjected to

real and perceived injustice and marginalization to join their kith and kin through the

instrumentality of relevant laws.

14. Conference also proposed stiff penalties for elected public office holders who

move from one political party to another before the expiration of their mandates. It said such

elected public office holders who abandoned their parties’ midway for new ones without cogent

reasons are to lose their seats.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



18

15. That the States Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) be scrapped and its

functions be transferred to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). It was

observed that the commission at the state levels has outlived its usefulness and has become a tool

for governors to manipulate elections into local government councils.

16. That the Electoral Act should be further strengthened to increase INEC’s capacity

to effectively monitor party conventions.

17. That the minimum academic qualification for candidates seeking elective

positions should be reviewed. For instance, for the Presidential, Governorship and National

Assembly candidates, first degree or its equivalent was set as the mandatory qualification.

Candidates seeking to contest for state Houses of Assembly and Local Government

Chairmanship elections are also expected to possess a first degree certificate or its equivalent

while secondary school leaving certificate or its equivalent was set as the minimum academic

qualification for candidates seeking election as local government councilors.

18. That government should not fund any political party but that they should be

funded through membership subscription, levies, donations, investments, sales of party cards and

other fund raising activities.

19. On anti-corruption and ethics in governance, conference accepted the proposal

that Anti-Corruption Agencies (ACAs), especially the Economic and Financial Crimes

Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), should take up

any corruption case that is in public domain without waiting for a petition. It said refusal by the

anti-corruption agencies to act on any corruption cases that has come to their knowledge shall

constitute an act of misconduct, criminal negligence or dereliction of duty that will attract

appropriate sanctions.

20. That henceforth, the office of the President of Nigeria shall rotate between the

North and South and revolve among the geo-political zones. It was also agreed that the office of

the state governors shall be rotated among the three senatorial districts of each state while that of

the local government chairman shall be rotated within the local government areas and

21. That local government councils not democratically elected shall not be recognized

by all authorities and persons and would not be entitled to any revenue allocation from the

Federation Account or the Account of the State Government or exercise any function exercisable

by local government councils.

The two main issues that could not be resolved at the conference are. First, the principle of

derivation to be enshrined in the constitution. As was the case in previous conferences when the

matter was tabled, it generated so much controversy and almost marred the outcome of the

Conference. Second, the issue of an acceptable structure for the federation generated serious

opposition especially by some section of the Northern delegates.

Although Conference adopted the position that Nigeria would remain a federation and that there

shall be a central government with states as the federating units, a section of the Northern

delegates were not comfortable with the arrangement as the local government ceases to be a third

tier of government. Their opposition was premised on the fact that the present arrangement

whereby the North has many more local governments than the other sections of the country will

be lost resulting in some loss in revenue accruing to the affected states from the federation

account.


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



19

Other areas the North stand to lose is the number of seats it currently has in the National

Assembly specifically in the House of Representatives. Although the Northern delegates were

not able to upturn the decision of Conference, that position strengthened their resolve to block

the popular position by delegates from the South and a large number of delegates from the

Middle Belt who were agreed that the derivation formula should be reviewed to 18% from the

present 13%.

All efforts made to resolve the impasse was not successful. Conference therefore proposed to

Government to constitute a Technical Committee to:

a. Review the percentage of revenue to states producing oil (and other resources)

b. Reconstruct and rehabilitate areas affected by problems of insurgency and internal

conflicts; and

c. Diversify the Nigerian economy by fast tracking the development of solid

minerals sector.

To address the contentious issue of an acceptable Federal structure for Nigeria, the Conference

proposed some amendments to the Constitution as follows:

1. Any state of the Federation wishing to do so may enact and give its self a Constitution for

that state but if any provision of the constitution of that state is inconsistent with any provision of

this constitution, this constitution shall prevail and that other provision shall to the extent of the

inconsistency be void.

2. If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution, this constitution

shall prevail, and that other law shall, to the extent of inconsistency be void.

1. Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state to be known by the name of the

Federal Republic of Nigeria.

(2a) Nigeria shall be a federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory

(2b) Nigeria shall be a Federal Government with States as the federating units.

3. The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a state based on the principles of democracy

and social justice.

4. It is hereby, accordingly declared that:

(a) Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this

constitution derives all its powers and authority.

(b) The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government and

(c) The participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with

the provisions of this Constitution.

5. The composition of the government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the

conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the Federal Character of

Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby

ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few ethnic or other sectional

groups in that government or in any of its agencies.

6. The composition of the Government of a State, a Local Government Council, or any of

the agencies of such government or council, the conduct of the affairs of the government or

council of such agencies shall be carried out in such a manner as to recognize the diversity of the


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



20

people within its areas of authority and the need to promote a sense of belonging and loyalty

among all the people of the federation.

Conference also resolved to push for creation of additional states to assuage the feelings of

minority groups. This in addition to the power rotation will put to rest the real and imagined fear

of minority groups in the country. Conference therefore proposed an amendment to the

Constitution to read:

There shall be fifty-four states in Nigeria, consisting of, Aba, Abia, Adada, Adamawa,

Akwaibom, Amana, Anambra, Anionma, Apa, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Benue, Borno, Cross River,

Delta, Ebonyi, Edo, Edu, Ekiti, (-) Enugu, Etiti, Ghari, Gombe, Gurara, Ijebu, Imo, Jigawa,

Kaduna, Kainji, Kano, Katagum, Katsina, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara, Lagos, Nasarawa, New Oyo,

Njaba-Anim, Niger, Ogoja, Ogun, Oil Rivers, Ondo, Ose, Osun, Oyo, Plateau, Rivers, Savannah,

Sokoto, Taraba, Yobe and Zamfara.

On the issue of derivation, Conference acknowledged that Nigeria is blessed with abundant

mineral resources and where these resources are fully developed, the issues of derivation will be

resolved as all states stand to earn trillions of dollars and benefit from any percentage set as

derivation. Conference resolved that 5% of funds accruing to the Federation account should be

set aside for solid minerals development.

CONCLUSION

There is a generally held belief that our differences and plurality along ethnic and religious lines

are only been negatively mobilized by the political elite. It can be observed at the Conference

that the divisions along these divides are deeply rooted in the consciousness of the average

Nigerian. Some policy decisions must be taken if only to assuage the feelings of some

disadvantaged groups and restore their faith in the Nigerian project.

References Adigun, A. et.al(2004) (eds.), Nigeria’s Struggle for Democracy and Good Governance, A

Festchrift for Oyeleye Oyediran, Ibadan, University Press Plc.

Agbaje, A.B, et.al (2004)eds. Nigeria’s Struggle for Democracy and Good Governance, Ibadan,

University Press Plc.

Albert, I.O(2001), The Yoruba and the National Question in Osaghae, EE. And Onwudiwe, E.

(eds.), The Management of the National Question in Nigeria, Ibadan: The Lord’s

Creation, for PEFS.

Amuwo, K. etal(1998) eds, Federalism and Political Restructuring in Nigeria Ibadan, Spectrum

Books.

Eliagwu, J.(2014) Peace Building, Elections and Sustainable Democracy. NIPPS International

Conference, on Political Parties and Violence-free Election in Nigeria, Abuja.

Egwu, S.(2014 ) Election Conflict Sensitivity in Nigeria: Trends and Perspectives, National

Institute of Policy and Strategic Street International Conference opcit.

Heibrunn, J.R.(1993) Social Origins of National Conference in Benin and Togo. Journal of

Modern African Studies, 31 (2).


Vol.8, No.2, pp.1-21, May 2020



21

Jinadu, A.(2014) Analysis of Emergent Threats to Elections and National Security: Before,

During and After Elections. NIPPS International Conference on Political Parties and

Violence –Free Elections in Nigeria Abuja Oct 27-28, 2014.

Nzouankey, J.M.(1993) The Role of the National Conference in the Transition to Democracy in

Africa, The Cases of the Benin and Mali, Issue, 21 (1 – 2).

Obasanjo, O.(2005) Strengthening the Structure of Democratic Governance in Nigeria, Address

at the Inauguration of the NPRC, Abuja: Office of the Special Assistant to the President

(Media).

Ojo, E.O.(2000) The Military and Democratic Transition in Nigeria: an in-depth Study of

General Babangida’s Transition programme, 1986 – 1993, Journal of Political and

Military Sociology, 23(2).

Okpe, O.O. ed,(2003) The Sovereign National Conference: Issues, Perspectives and Challenges,

Makurdi, Aboki publishers.

Omotola, J.S.(2005) Citizenship, Ethnic Violence and Governmental Response: The Declaration

of a state of Emergency in plateau State, Nigeria, National Conference on inter-group

Relations in Nigeria, Nasarawa State.

Omotola, J.S.(2004) The Search for a Stable Governmental System in Nigeria, Nigeria, Forum,

25 (9-10).

Onwudiwe, E. and Suberu R.T., ed,(2005) Nigeria Federalism in crisis: Critical Perspective,

political options, Ibadan, Programmes on Ethnic and Federal Studies (PEFS).

Olukoshi A. and Ogbu, O.(1996) The Deepening Crisis of Nigeria Federalism and the Future

of Nigeria State, In Olukoshi, A and Laakso, L (eds), Challenges to the Nation State in

Africa, Nordiska Afrika institute. Upsala.

Omitogun W. and Onigu- Otite K.(1996) The National Conference as a Model for Democratic

Transition, Benin and Nigeria, Ibadan, IFRA Occasional Publication No. 6.

Onyeoziri, F. (2002) Alternative Policy Options for Managing the National Question in Nigeria,

Ibadan, The Lords Creation, for PEFS.

Osaghae, E.E. (2005) Forewords: Nigeria Federalism: A Project in Crisis in Onwudiwe, E and

Suberu, R.T ed opcit.

Ovwasa, O.L (1999) Oil and the Minority Question in Saliu, H.A (ed), Issues in the

contemporary Political Economy of Nigeria, Ilorin, Sally and Associates.

Saliu, H.A. and Omotola, J.S(2006). Food Insecurity and National Question in Nigeria, in Saliu

H.A. A. Jimoh and G.T. Arosanyin (eds). The National Question and some selected

Topical Issues on Nigeria. 156-181, (2006), Ibadan, Vantage publishers.

NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2014 DOCUMENTS

1. Proposed Amendments to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as

Amended

2. Annexure 4 Media Bulletin.

3. Report of the Committee on Devolution of Powers –A Minority Report by Annkio

Briggs.

RESTRUCTURING: RESOLVING THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN …

Documents

Transcript of RESTRUCTURING: RESOLVING THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN …